Thanks so much for your thorough analysis, Clayton!

I concur with your summary, and would be especially concerned about the lack of any review and the limitation of content types, both of which were strongly desired by survey responders. 

-----Original Message-----

From: Crenshaw, Clayton E. [mailto:ClaytonE_Crenshaw@baylor.edu]

Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 6:01 PM

To: 'Amanda M Goodsett'; Andrea Beckendorf; Brennan, Patricia B. M.; Jonathan Sauceda; Lazar,Lisa A; Sara Nodine

Subject: MLA Instruction Subcommittee - CORA

After comparing our database needs and wants with the Project CORA site, here are my observations, some of which Mandi has already identified.   - Clayton

PROS:

Permits multiple documents to be attached to posts.

Contributors can update their submissions at any time.

Posts include sections for Learning Outcomes, Course Context, Pitfalls/Teaching Tips, Relevant Links, and Additional Resources. 

Individual posts can have comments, some of which are identified as adaptations of the original idea.  An account is required for comments, which should control spam.

Search options include the basic categories from both the ACRL Standards and the Framework.  Also included are student level and group vs. individual.  Tags provide another layer of metadata, and there is also a keyword search. 

Music-related posts can be isolated using the discipline limit.

The site incorporates a blog where the community can share their experiences and get updates.

All contributions can be shared through a single Creative Commons license.

Potentially greater visibility for music librarians who contribute.

CONS:

CORA's content is more focused than what we had planned.  It contains a wide variety of "assignments," but it is not broad enough to include syllabi or course outlines.

Anyone with the appropriate credentials can be a contributor, and there is no peer review process. 

The posts do not have as many fields as we wanted.  For instance, I don't see any separate database fields for: duration, materials needed, or library resources used. 

Brief profiles are provided for the contributors, but no contact information (by default).

Permitted file types are limited-it does not permit sharing of PowerPoint files, Blackboard modules, etc. 

SUMMARY:

CORA looks like a solid platform for sharing instructional methods and materials, and it has many of the features that the Subcommittee outlined and that our colleagues suggested.  If we adopted it, though, we would have to give up some things.  The important ones that I see are:

Librarian and music focus - We would be part of a site that covers all disciplines, and we would have to share the music space with music faculty members, graduate students, and others.

Peer review - 86% of the 2014 survey respondents wanted content to be peer-reviewed.

Content - We would not be able to share some of the content types that have been suggested, and the posts would not contain some of our desired information fields.

Contacts - Surprisingly, CORA does not provide an easy way to contact the contributors.

-----Original Message-----

From: Amanda M Goodsett [mailto:a.goodsett@csuohio.edu]

Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2016 1:48 PM

To: Andrea Beckendorf <beckenan@luther.edu>; Brennan, Patricia B. M. <PBrennan@ric.edu>; Crenshaw, Clayton E. <ClaytonE_Crenshaw@baylor.edu>; Jonathan Sauceda <jonathan.sauceda@rutgers.edu>; Lazar,Lisa A <llazar@uakron.edu>; Sara Nodine <snodine@fsu.edu>

Subject: MLA Instruction Subcommittee

Hi everyone,

I don't know if any of you are on the acrlframe list-serv, but there has been some positive talk about CORA recently (see below). In my experimentation with CORA, it seemed like a good fit with our needs as described in the documents from our work space on the MLA website. There's an option to indicate the discipline of the assignments, so it would be easy for music librarians to just look at relevant music information literacy assignments. The interface is also really visually appealing and user-friendly. To submit assignments, librarians will have to register with the site, but the process is really straight-forward and registering allows you to have a sort of teaching profile, which I really like. It's possible to attach a number of documents to an assignment, and all submitted assignments are licensed under a CC BY NC SA license. The only downside is that assignments aren't peer-reviewed (although members can add comments and in order to submit you must be affiliated with an educational institution). That said, my vote is still to go with CORA for our assignment repository.

As far as the other ideas that are due on Friday, I don't have anyone to recommend for the Framework working group. I'm very interested in this topic and I'd love to be involved, but I realize that the group needs to be small and probably consist of more experienced librarians. :)

I also don't really have any suggestions for proposals that we might sponsor that have to do with the theme of international students. However, if there is any place for it, I have been doing a lot of experimentation with using technology (i.e. Google forms, Padlet, tutorials, etc. - http://researchguides.csuohio.edu/mus113) in the classroom with music students and I would be interested in presenting about that--if not this year, then in the future.

Mandi

Mandi Goodsett

Performing Arts & Humanities Librarian

Michael Schwartz Library, RT 110D

Cleveland State University

a.goodsett@csuohio.edu

216-802-3362

In my instruction sessions, I've seen that new international students can really struggle.  Many have not had access to a large music library before, and may still be struggling with English.  So perhaps we could highlight ways in which to improve their learning outcomes and lower their stress levels, while not derailing the rest of the class.  It would not have to be limited to FTF instruction, of course--we could also talk about the online environment.

Please give feedback on this idea and, if it seems like something we should develop, then please contribute your ideas too.

- Clayton